Attorneys for a former Joliet Township trustee facing pandemic fraud charges may consider appealing a legal issue they contend makes the evidence against their client inadmissible.

On Tuesday, Will County Judge Jessica Colón-Sayre once again ruled there is nothing in state law that prevents prosecutors from using unemployment compensation records in their case against Karl Ferrell, 45, of Joliet.

Since 2022, Ferrell has been facing charges of theft by deception, loan fraud, wire fraud, forgery, state benefits fraud and failure to file income tax returns.

The charges alleged Ferrell received $11,230 in unemployment benefits in 2021, during a time he received $39,623 from the Paycheck Protection Program.

That program was established to help struggling businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Despite Colón-Sayre’s ruling, she told Jeff Tomczak, one of Ferrell’s attorneys, that she was open to an appeal on the issue. Tomczak is expected to let the judge know on Dec. 17 whether he will appeal.

The appeal could affect whether Ferrell’s case moves forward to trial, which has been scheduled for March 2.

Ferrell was part of a Democratic slate that was elected to the Joliet Township board in 2021.

Ferrell left the board in 2023 after a Will County judge and an appellate court ruled he was not qualified to hold township office based on his past felony convictions.

During Tuesday’s court hearing, Tomczak told Colón-Sayre that prosecutors cannot use unemployment compensation records in their case because those are considered confidential under the Illinois Unemployment Insurance Act.

The law also prohibits the use of those records in court proceedings, Tomczak said.

Will County Assistant State’s Attorney Michael Casson has said previously the state benefits fraud statute provides a “law enforcement exception” to the confidentiality provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act.

Casson said Tuesday the privileged communications provision of the law does not say anything regarding criminal proceedings.

Colón-Sayre asked Tomczak, “How is the state going to prosecute these types of cases?”

Tomczak said unless she thought the the language of the Unemployment Insurance Act was ambiguous, she was stuck with the “plain language” of the law, which he considered “clear as a bell.”

Colón-Sayre said she didn’t think the language was ambiguous. She said Tomczak presented a “very clever” argument but she found nothing in the law that precluded the prosecution of Ferrell.